Roundup: Sort of balanced

Posted on by

So, that was the budget. Woo. They say it’s balanced, but only by virtue of the asset sales and raiding both the EI and the contingency funds, which in reality means it’s still actually in deficit. Oh, and the normally $3 billion contingency will only be $1 billion next year and $2 billion the year after that, never mind that it’s a time of a “fragile global economy” and extremely slow growth. But! Balanced! (More or less). For analysis, here are nine takeaways from the budget, the bottom line for most people, and for the low- and middle-income Canadians. And yes, it’s not too surprising that the opposition calls it a budget for the rich (and more to the point, rich seniors). There is mention of the plans for reforming public servants’ sick days, money for the Iraq mission, and promises to boost defence spending (but less than what is actually needed to maintain capabilities). Stephen Gordon writes about the fiscal discipline of the government’s five-year plan to slay the deficit, while Mike Moffatt writes about the budget’s effect on manufacturing and internal trade. And in case you’re curious, Rosemary Barton gives you a look inside the lockup.

Good reads:

  • In the Duffy trial, the owner of the business used to funnel those contracts through – Duffy’s friend’s son, not the friend himself – took the stand, and as usual, here’s the Köhler take.
  • My column this week takes exception to the notion that the Senate itself is being put on trial in the Duffy case.

Odds and ends:

Jim Prentice’s campaign bus was hit by his protection detail’s SUV, and suddenly another political metaphor was born.